At Prospect: Multiverse theory is undermining the integrity of physics

Over the last few decades “multiverse theories” have become increasingly fashionable within a relatively small—but publicly vocal—group of theoretical physicists. This group specialises in foundational problems in cosmology, particle physics, and quantum mechanics. These theories are advertised as science’s answer to much that we can’t otherwise explain about the universe we inhabit, the elementary particles we have discovered in it, and the reasons for our own existence.

…

The first victim is context. For example, in a recent post to this blog, Philip Ball reports on a paper published by a team of astrophysicists in the “Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society.” Ball reports on this paper with an accuracy entirely consistent with his reputation as one of Britain’s best science writers, but it so happens that the paper is not about multiverse theory. And yet “multiverse theory” appears in the title. On publication, Prospect magazine tweeted a link with a caption that refers to “new ‘multiverse’ calculations,” implying that this is all about a real scientific multiverse theory, with the capacity to perform calculations (and, by association, make predictions) when multiverse theory actually can’t do any of this. This kind of thing helps to compound the deception, normalising multiverse theory as validated science. More.

The multiverse is believed and promoted without evidence precisely because it is not science. It is a philosophical stance against seeing any significance in the features of our own our universe. That doesn’t require evidence, just the ability to generate media-friendy theories, using the trappings of theoretical physics.

One Reply to “At Prospect: Multiverse theory is undermining the integrity of physics”

I don’t really think this is a very accurate representation of multiverse theory, which originated as a model used to describe quantum experimental results – most notably the various two-slit experiments. Although the materialist factions in the scientific community have been, IMO, misusing the theory in service of their ideology (as you say, to avoid the significance of the cosmological values of our universe), just because they do so doesn’t mean the theory itself is “non-scientific” or “a philosophical stance.”

What materialists ignore about the multiverse theory in order to cling to their worldview is the evidence that consciousness is primary when it comes to the actual physical reality we experience – IOW, how photons behave depends on what we know (and can know) about their potential locations. In this sense, multiverse theory is actually anti-materialist because it indicates that unless a conscious mind is involved, there is no actual real (physical) universe at all, only a field of information potentials.

There’s no sense in blacklisting a theory just because materialists mistakenly misuse it to support their failing worldview.